i can't wait for this one. before you check into another hotel check out how much they already know about you. it's pretty astonishing. do not miss judge scott wapner's documentary, hotels behind kloss closed doors at marriott. always a gj -- good evening, everyone. i'm larry kudlow. in minnesota, we finally found a tax democrats don't like. both of that state's ultra liberal senators are speaking out about an obama care tax on medical device companies. 16 other democrats in the senate are joining them. geez, i may faint.

now to washington, d.c. with fed chairman ben bernanke sent a chill down the spine of traders on wall street. bernanke said the fed's money printing should last only until we hit 6.5% unemployment. markets didn't like that one bit and a good rally was completely erased. and we go to damascus where the assad regime is firing scud missiles and where did those missiles come from anyway? in a letter to senate majority leader harry reid, 18 democratic senators are requesting a sweetheart deal to delay a 2.3% medical device tax that is part of obama care. due to start january 1st. but you know what, may i with all respect, these guys are hypocrites. they're not supply siders. yes, the tax is a job killer, as

they say, but it's only hitting their states. the senators claim the medical device tax kills jobs but why aren't they against all the other job killing obama care taxes or for that matter the fiscal cliff tax hikes that are coming. let's faulk about this. we have igor volsky and guy benson. guy benson, i am glad they have won't up to this lousy medical device tax but did someone say minnesota where, wait, medtronic and st. jude medical are the biggest companies? they're the ones that make the equipment? and senator klobuchar and senator al franken are all of a sudden making a beef because it's in their state? where they been, guy benson, and when did they discover that taxes are job kimmers? >> i thought that wasn't the case at all. you're right. they didn't just wake up to this.

let's be completely honest about what happened here. they knew all along that the medical device tax was not just a job killer but would really stifle medical innovation. we've heard this from people across the spectrum. the people involved in this industry who are making america the leader when it comes to world medical innovation, they're saying this is really going to put a crimp in what we're able to accomplish. now at the last minute, the 11th hours, you have 18 johnny come late live democrats, all of those who voted for the larger bill in obama care years ago are saying we have to get rid of this thing. >> there's a better one, igor. i know you're going to argue the other side but there's a better one. senator elizabeth warren may be the most left senator we have had in decades. she's become an anti-tax supply sider. you know why? there are over 400 medical device companies in

massachusetts. 400 of them. and she, therefore, doesn't want to tax them one bit. now, my question to her and to you is why don't you apply the exact same logic, high taxes, job killers, to the rest of the economy, including obama care tax hikes and including fiscal cliff tax hikes. where's the largic of this position or is it just hypocritical sweetheart deal stuff? >> i don't agree it's a tax killer. the taxes are put into place that the sectors of health care benefit reform, insurers, hospital, medical device companies hoar going to see gain when you have 30 million americans going into the health care system that they also help keep the law sustainable. >> but, wait, i don't understand. we're talking about taxes. come back to the main point. the main point is why are these 18 democrats suddenly opposed to a job killing tax, particularly elizabeth warren, particularly al franken, who are two lefty

liberals who love high taxes. is it because, a, they've seen the logic of supply side economics or, b, they're hypocrites because they're just trying to protect their own companies in their own states? >> they have the medical device lobby in their back yard, that's who they're listening to. if they don't want to do this tax, bits $30 billion over ten years to fund the health care expansion, they should find $30 billion of new revenue. if we keep the loss sustainable, you could move these things around. but the answer isn't to delay, postpone, get rid of it, it's how do you fund this law and how do you move forward? they don't want the device tax, i want to hear their solution. >> guy benson, i don't want the obama care tax on investment, 3.8%. that a job killer. it's on capital gains, it's on dividends, it's on small business. you know what, guy benson, i don't want 09.9% payroll tax hike. that's a job killer, too. if it's a job killer in minnesota, it should be a job killer for the rest of the country. if it's a job killer in

massachusetts, why not the rest of the country? where's the logic, guy benson? >> there isn't much and i think that your option b is what is really going on here. it is fascinating to listen and watch igor sort of staking out some ground to the left of elizabeth warren and al franken, just to give you a sense of where he's coming from there and he's of course entitled to that opinion. this is not the first time we've seen this. this is the third element of obama care that even democrats are peeling away from. they repealed a 1099 withholding piece of the law that was totally, totally destructive for businesses and really very onerous and they've gotten rid of the class act. the administration itself has pretty much thrown the class act in the garbage. the question is why are they all of a sudden abandoning various programs? >> let me just get at this job killing idea. when you have a law that brings 30 million people into the health care marketplace, they now have insurance, these are

the folks who are going to be using the medical devices, who are going to be using hospitals, insurers. that's why those sectors are benefiting and that's why the law asks them to contribute. i think it's fair, especially since it's narrow lee tailored, it doesn't hit the over-the-counter medical device ps. >> you know what's so great, igor, guy benson is right. you are to the left of elizabeth warren and al franken. i never thought such a thing is possible. i'm proud of you, igor. this is great stuff. >> he also apparently knows how to runs businesses when it comes if p to medical devices better than those companies themselves out of some sort of sense of fairness here. >> that's not fair, guy. >> i didn't interrupt. you interrupted me. let me make one more point. i think it is important to recognize why the class act and the 1099 withholding forum and medical device tax are now getting broomed by democrats. they needed to take a -- pack a bunch of these revenues into the

cbo score to try to fool the american people into thinking that this price tag for obama care was going to be way lower than it actually is. now the law is passed. we know that the real cost is going to totally explode the deficit, yet another broken promise of obama care and since they've passed a lot and cobbled together the votes, they're willing to throw this stuff overboard and we still have to pay for this sometimes. >> igor, i got 25 seconds. last word, my friend. >> i know it kills you that democrats are being the conservatives here and paying for this expansion with increased revenues and savings -- >> i'm all for it. >> i know it kills you. >> i would give elizabeth warren a big kiss and hug but what i would ask her before i give her the kiss and hug is that she apply the same idea that rising taxes is a job killer, not just to the 400 medical technical companies in her state, but to the entire american economy because we have been saying that for, i don't know, 40 years.

that's all. what's good for the goose is good for the gander. i like a little consistency. igor, you're a consistent man. >> thank you. >> you're to the left of all of them. i respect that. >> igor volsky and guy benson. >> we also had some real market news today thanks to the fed. ben bernanke promised mother round of easing and he's going to buy $45 billion worth of treasury every month, which will add to the 40 billion of morlt bonds he's already been buying. but in a curveball, he linked this program to 6.5% unemployment and 2.5% inflation. so the idea being if we hit those numbers, then the zero interest rate target policy will go away and the fed might stop buying bonds and punching in all this extra money supply stuff, maybe. at least that's what some people think. to clarify this, whether it's good, bad or otherwise, we bring in our friend, the editor of real clear markets. good evening, john.

first of all, what do you make of this? bernanke comes out with this stuff and first the market loves it and then the market hates it. we're going to talk about stocks later but what do you make of bern can i have's policy? >> this would be funny if it weren't so sad. these are the droolings of an adolescent. only a child can believe that you can create economic growth and prosperity simply by buying bonds and creating dollars. how is that going to drive the software innovator in austin or in silicon valley to create the next best thing? it's ludicrous. it's not going to work. it's going to slow down economic growth. >> in 2008 the fed's balance sheet, just like a family or bank balance sheet, $800 billion because it's the fed. at the end of next year, based on what bernanke said today, that balance sheet is going to be $4 trillion. it is absolutely extraordinary with the zero interest rate and all the money they're creating. now john tamny, i know the

federal can produce money and destroy the dollar, but the federal can't produce jobs, can't produce which is investment, can't produce prosperity because if they could, it would have happened already. that's the problem i'm having with this whole business with bernanke. why hasn't it happened already? >> exactly. wouldn't life be easy if the path to job growth were were just creating dollars the reality is the fed's program is going to do the opposite of create jobs. think about it, what do investors do when they invest in future companies? they're buying future dollar income streams. the fed's very actions are telling investors you'd be a fool to commit capital to new ideas because if you're lucky enough to get returns down the line, they'll come back and cheapen the dollars. that's why this is going to be qe infinity because we'll never get to a true 6.5% unemployment rate. >> what should he do, john? >> monetary policy should be about one thing, stabilizing the value of the dollar. the dollar is a measure. it's not an economic input. if you stabilize the value of

the dollar, you are going to get real economic growth. anything sells going to distort economic activity and make us much more worse off. >> it's all gone to the big banks, the trading commodities, they're trading current say, lot of it goes overseas, john. i mean, if it was going to work, it would have worked. i guess that's still my point. >> it would have worked long ago and we have to remember if the dollar is the most important price in the world, and it is, the second most important price in the world is the cost of credit. it's how we allocate capital, it's how many we match borrowers and savers. the problem with this today, the fed is keeping rates artificial live low. just like you have shortages of apartments when you put on price controls on apartments, you're seeing the same thing here. lending is only being allocated to those politically connected, not to the small business needing capital to grow. >> whatever happened to king

dollar backed by commodity and gold? >> it disappeared with the reagan boom. that's why we've seen slow economic growth ever since since. we know there is inflation and we know pries sighly because economic growth is weak. when we have inflation, investment flow noose inflation hedges, as it's do noug, over the intels and microsofts and googles of the future. if you want economic growth, you are must strengthen and stabilize the dollar. the fed is doing the opposite. >> john, what if gold dropped substantially and the dollar rose. what would that mean for our economy? >> it would mean growth yet again. you wouldcy limited capital would flow away from these inflation hedges that achieve no real economic growth and back into the knowledge economy, back into the technology firms that will make us more efficient. back into the ideas of the future. >> so it would be good, be a good thing. get gold town, get the dollar up. >> listen to this, folks.

team obama is talking about a growth policy by cutting corporate tax rates and reforming the corporate code. that's right, i said cutting the tax rate. if there's any truth to it, i will optimistically support it. free market capitalism is the best path to prosperity, including corporate business tax reform, which i have wanted for so long, i can't even remember. i'm kudlow. we'll be back soon.

welcome back to the "kudlow report." facebook is paying interns the astonishing sums of $5,600 a month. that's about $67,000 a year and $25,000 more than the average u.s. salary. well, tech companies pay well because they want to recruit top engineering and math talent. the corporate taxes may be part of the fiscal cliff talks. here is dan mitchell, senior

fellow at the cato institute. google stashed $10 million in bermuda, hp has almost all of its cash offshore and apple said to shareholders, two-thirds of its $121 billion of cash is held outside the united states. now why is that? is it just because they hate america? >> two things to understand. number one, everything they do is completely legal. it's foreign source income that is being taxed in the countries where it's being earned. but, number, two, the u.s. has the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world. these companies if they bring that money back to the united states will be double taxed on top of what they paid oversea, yes, with some credit so maybe it doesn't get too much above 35% but we are shooting ourselves in the foot with very bad corporate tax policy. >> will president obama clahang

that with this talk of corporate tax reform? >> i don't want to burst your bubble. i'm not sure the administration is serious about this. we've seen there idea of corporate tax reform and it makes our world wide tax system more expansive so companies don't even have the ability to delay the second layer of tax. i think this is a little bit of a bait being dangled in front of republicans into what's going to be a very bad budget deal. >> i've heard this before and interviewed secretary the guy nerks the obama plan would take the corporate tax rate from 35% to 28%. is that in this bill? what's wrong with that? >> first of all, we don't have an actual proposal from the obama administration. again, i think this is just a little distraction, a bobble that they're dangling in front of the republicans. but if we got the rate down to 28%, it depends on how they're,

quote, paying for it, unquote. and if they make our world wide tax system worse, if they force companies to declare investment expenses as taxable income, that's going to bias the system against new call tapital. there's all sorts of bad ways to finance it. on the other hand, if they're getting rid of the ethanol loophole and all that, it's good news. i don't trust the white house because their track record is so far to the left. >> you're not trusting them, i get that. what about this sort of conundrum. supposed they did drop the corporate tax rate from 35 to 28 and pay for it with loophole closures and put that aside. if you're a small business, you might still be sitting with higher tax rate because the upper end tax rates are going up. a small business subchapter s may be at 40% or 44% with obama care, while the c-corp rate goes

down to 28%. now there's something wrong with that picture. >> there's definitely something wrong with that picture. we have to keep in mind that the c-corps, they pay off dividends, they're subject to double taxation, which obama wants to much o tofr 40%. here's what's really ironic of what happened in washington. the president just bought the big crony capitalist and they all said, yes, we should raise tax rates on their small business competitors. i think that's outrageous to have these cronyists figuring out ways to hurt the small and upcoming business, the ones that create the net new jobs in the economy. i think if republicans had any brains, they would say let's slap a 20% exice tax on the salary of ceos that endorse. >> you're aing the big boys, the big boys, they're happen to

see -- that would put the future big business out of business. is that what you're saying? the business round table is guilty of this and they're in cahoots with president obama. >> i don't think they're doing it to sabotage small businesses. taxpayers are in a life boat together, they know the shark is go to eat somebody. >> why don't we just have a 20% flat tax rate? why don't we just have one single flat tax rate, make it real simple? >> larry, you and i have been talking about that for decades, not that we're old enough to have been talking for decades. if we were like hong kong or singapore, we'd have that 5% to 6% growth, have a lot more prosperity. unfortunately washington is dominated by this fixed pie, class warfare money at that

time. >> u get rid of the corruption, the cronyism, the lousy growth rate. man, give me a flax tax rate. we can figure it out. all right, folks. now speaking of setting this economy loss, it would have the biggest names on wall street had some very rosie predictions today for the near future. jamie dimon and lloyd blank fine will be all smiles on one condition. we'll tell you what that is just ahead. stay with us.

bullish words from big names day. jackie deangelis joins us. >> some the biggest names in business spoke candidly on a number of pressing issues. a big part of the discussion today sen terg centering on tax on the rich, a subject on which lloyd blankfein had an interesting take. >> having higher rates means the ultimate return will be lower, people will have less incentive at the margin. it takes money out of economy, doesn't put it in. it's a negative, not a positive. but it's medicine that we're in a position to not be able to turn away because we have other things that are looming that are more negative and more consequential. >> in addition to blankfein,

jamie dimon offered input as to how he sees the economic recovery at this point in time. listen to what he had to say. >> the table is set very well right now, 5 million more people working than four years ago, housing has turned the corner. let's just keep it going. >> that was jamie dimon taking an optimistic view on the economy and an even more encouraging stance on the fiscal cliff. >> we are one decision away from restoring our fiscal and moral authority around the world. let's just do it. >> larry, dimon echoing what many emare feeling around. >> well, i think the worst case calamity, that all taxes go up, will not happen. i think there's going to be a deal where most tax rates are extended but a lot of top rates are going to go up and mr. bl k blankfein is right, it's not going to really help the economy that much.

jackie, thank you, we appreciate it. ben bernanke, wow, i think he spooked the markets today. he said something that erased the entire rally. but did people really hear him right? that's up next. we're going to try to figure out bernanke. i was worried the health care system spoke a language all its own with unitedhealthcare, i got help that fit my life. information on my phone. connection to doctors who get where i'm from. and tools to estimate what my care may cost. so i never missed a beat. we're more than 78,000 people looking out for more than 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

try running four.ning a restaurant is hard, fortunately we've got ink. it gives us 5x the rewards on our internet, phone charges and cable, plus at office supply stores. rewards we put right back into our business. this is the only thing we've ever wanted to do and ink helps us do it. make your mark with ink from chase.

welcome back to "the kudlow report." in this half hour, look at these violent scenes from michigan. the right to work battle was far from peaceful in the state capital yesterday, and it's not over. why are these unions so angry about giving workers free choice? why is so much of the news media carrying the union's water by not reporting the story? we'll have some answers in just a little while. now, the market gyrated today over ben bernanke and the fed. at first they loved the new bond buying and money printing message. but then they gave up all their gains feeling unemployment may drop faster and the party would somehow be over. i'm not sure i understand this but we'll ask our experts mike,

i gue i guess the idea is maybe the unemployment gets to 6.5% and the 0 interest rate goes up, why would that be bad? sometimes i don't understand the stock market at all. >> i don't think it's the employment figure. i think it's the inflation number that bernanke threw out there, larry. you also mentioned 2.5% inflation as being certainly that would look him put the brakes on. we look at treasuries relative to tips, it's a at 3.08%. i think the market is saying we might be where bernanke is talking about inflation and putting on the brakes. i think that's why bond yields broke today. >> that's very interesting. i hadn't thought about that, the forwards, you're right, are over 3%. but art hogan, a lot of people think ben bernanke doesn't care about enflags and only cares about employment and unemployment.

again, i ask you, if the unemployment rate dropped to 6.5% because the economy is better than it is now, why wouldn't that be great news for stocks? why wouldn't even a whiff of inflationi be great for stocks? >> if we get the unemployment level down, both of thos will be very positive, especially if it happens because we're creating jobs and not because people are leaving the job market. if you look at what bernanke did today, though, there was no new news necessarily. we replaced operation twist with a new round of bond buying so the amounts are staying exactly the same. so we didn't get new news there and he let us know exactly what he's thinking about in terms of exiting, which gives great flexibility to the fed. what's really going to happen is keep an eye on the marketplace, things get better, we have the ability to pull out and we're

don't have to let you no when it's going to happen. >> lloyd blankfein guess he wants this deal to go through. but he said in another place that long-term interest rates are going up. he warned they may go up faster than peel think. and ray dalio of bridgewater, another smart guy, similarly warned the bond market is too expensive and may sell off. in those guys are right, dalio is a brilliant bond manager. if bonds sell off and long-term rates go up, what does what mean? >> i think it means that the stock market is also going to fall. the federal's balance sheet now at 2.8 trillion with their zero percent traits have been the drivers of the stock market. it's also finance consumer purchase things bought on interest rates, whether it be cars or big appliances. they're talking about only 3.8% revenue growth for the s&p 500

next year and about 8.9% earnings growth. >> you're not going to get it if revenues only have grown 3%. we've had 80% gain since twine on sales per employees and you're already seeing a ten-year low of interest expenses for companies in terms of eating around at revenues. >> basically you're on the bear side, right. >> i'm on to gold, larry. i'm on to gold. >> art hogan, we manage to get into this whole show without talking about the miss call cliff, where nothing new happened today at all. why hasn't the stock market done better since the fed's announcement of buying all these bonds? that was in september. it's been okay, it's been okay, but it raent rallied big. today they said another 45 billion per month. they're going to create it and

buy more money. >> i think's a tron reasons and i anything order there's a great deal of economic and you look at the holiday shopping that is better than expected. i know we don't want to talk about this but until we get to theness call cliff. i think we get something sooner rather than later, where there's actually some middle ground here, i think the market is a coiled spring and can sploud to the -- that looks sub. >> it could happen before the end of this year. without that it's hard to have the market get out of the way. >> one bear, one bill. gentlemen, thank you very much.

while everyone's talking about the fiscal cliff, our next guest is a republican from texas. he is about to become the chair of the very powerful financial services committee and he is going to have his platef full o that unwith. as always, congressman, thank you for coming on. >> thank you, larry. >> before we get to your new post, let me ask you this. there's a great article by nobel prize winner. he adds up the income taxes, payroll taxes, state and local sales taxes and he says the average effective tax rate in this country is now 40%. and he says it's hurting work effort and it's hurting consumption. my question is this -- in this discussion of the cliff and raising taxes, does anybody talk about that, what this added burden is going snob. >> well, all the time. again, it is just a truism that

washington has a spending problem, not a taxing problem. and any of this talk, larry, of taxation is frankly just a distortion from the huge fiscal abyss. the fiscal cliff is a pothole relative to the size of our government. the our problem is a spending problem, principally driven by entitlement spending growing at 6%, 7%, 8%. now i'm fearful under the president's economic policy, the new norm is 1.5% to 2% gdp growth. that math doesn't add up. >> that's the thing. if that was the new norm, if i were in there, i wouldn't want to raise taxes but i get your point. you're going to run the financial services committee, an extremely important post. just in brief, sir, i'm sure

you've thought about dodd-frank. i just want to get your basic take. what does dodd-frank mean to the financial system and to the economy as you see it, as you ascend to this position of chairman? >> well, i think the regulatory burden is huge and what dodd-frank has done is, number one, not addressed the true route of the financial crisis of '08, which was a lot of federal policies, frankly, that con joeled and mandated financial institutions to loan money to people to buy homes that ultimately they couldn't afford to keep. i know they're psychologically worse off. second, it adds layers, the weight, volume and load and uncertainty of the regulatory burden is a drag on our cap tap markets. besides fundamental tax reform, we ought to have policy that

ensure we vlt deepest, most liquid. a huge part of our solution is economic growth and dodd-frank is a huge drag on that because what it does is it simply empowers bureaucrats with power and if they were so smart, we wouldn't have gotten into the pickle in the first place. >> many people say dodd-franks keeps too big to fail. would you seem to reform that? >> absolutely, larry. one of the most important things we need to do is to do everything he can to take his too big to fail to stick it back in. frankly, the close kissing cousin of too big to fail is crony capitalism, which allows the slin dras of the world to be financed. and, you know, there's nothing here a good dose of premarket

capitalism with a lot of transparency and some elements of personal responsibility couldn't bring us off a the vocal announces -- >> whether banks should pay for their own trade or not. banks trading for their own account. will you seek to enforce the so-called volcker rule, which would prevent them from training for their own account and staying away from the high risk? >> i think if you use the term enforce, we're not in the enforcement business. i don't see the compelling evidence where proprietary trading is number one related to the '08 crisis. you have to look to future crisis as well. this rule is so convoluted, so complex, that ultimately end users are going to be affected,

it's going to drive up the cost of capital and harm employment even worse. it's one of these cases that did really appears that the cure is worse than the illness and the cure didn't even impact the original illness. >> we're going to have to leave it there. currently house republican congress fren chairman. now to the developing situation in syria where the assad regime is firing scud miss else at its own people. the question is will chemical weapons being loaded on to the skids? we'll have the latest for you just ahead.

wooohooo....hahaahahaha!

oh...there you go. wooohooo....hahaahahaha! i'm gonna stand up to her! no you're not. i know. you know ronny folks who save hundreds of dollars switching to geico sure are happy. how happy are they jimmy? happier than a witch in a broom factory. get happy. get geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more. welcome back to "the kudlow report." just a few hours north korea launched a three-stage rocket early wednesday, the state department condemned the watch, the defense department saying kim jong un can spend his money launching missiles or feed his people but he can't have both. the missile is capable of taking a nuclear bomb to a target in the region.

the syrian military has been fighting scud missiles at rebily fighters. while there's no evidence that they have been loaded with chemical weapons, at many as saturday scud missiles have been fired over several days. welcome back mark ginsburg. is assad pushing the pan being button? >> this 1945. he's in the bunker, throwing everything he can at the point. it's a desperate move on his part because the rebels are closing in. it was those very scud missiles that saddam hussein lobbed at israel and there was great fear that those scud missiles are capable -- i said capable -- of having weapons of mass destruction on their war head. >> we don't really know. we're assuming know but it's possible these could be housing chemical weapons? >> there had already been reports, larry, earlier this

week. that's why secretary of defense panetta and the president of the united states warned assad publicly about using wmd or chemical weapons against his own people. but let's remember he has more or less given control over a lot of his wmd stock piles, of which it is a huge amount to potentially hezbollah or irani revolutionary guards who are forces for the desperate forces that fight for the survival of the regime. >> let's assume you're right and he's transferring these weapons and missiles. what can we do about these? >> on two things we can do. incinerate the stock piles from the air before they're tliefl loaded on scud missiles or it's going to take a significant ground invasion of about 50,000 troops from wherever they're going to come from, i don't know, to basically secure these stock piles because syria, larry, has the largest stockpile

of chemical weapons in the entire middle east outside of iran. >> that statement, 50,000 troops to secure it. who and where is that going to come from? >> well, that's the question of what do as the president mean when he said that syria better not cross that red line. what's the or else? what are the consequences? has this administration done the adequate preparation to secure these weapons so they're not used as a final act of desperation against sear i don't's population. that remains to be seen. >> the president once again repeated that we're throwing in with the so-called syrian reb ills. but do we know who those rebels are? do we think they're clean? >> on the contrary. the good rebels are meeting in morocco now under the friends of syria meeting that's taking place there.

at the same time that the president acknowledged the recognition of those rebels, he put on a black list a group called ah noure, that is an al qaeda linked organization. in every place you're going to have collide ka extremists, criminal gangs in ruin revolutionary guards. they're going to do everything they can to make syria a state. >> in the race for the skid -- hezbollah peace go. >> i already have reason o believe from intelligence reports that i received that there have already been commercial transactions between what are of the syrian army and hezbollah. remember, between iran to the east and hezbollah to the west,

these shiite forces are determined be to do everything they can to prevent assad from falling and having a sunni regime emerge. now we're really talking about major sectarian war in that region. >> tough stuff. thankinin. >> we're going to switch gears and go to the union wars, literally. why does the main street media cover it all up by bare live recording it. alabama, louisiana or florida, they're gonna love it. shaul, your alabama hospitality is incredible. thanks, karen.

love your mississippi outdoors. i vote for your florida beaches, dawn. bill, this louisiana seafood is delicious. we're having such a great year on the gulf, we've decided to put aside our rivalry. now is the perfect time to visit anyone of our states. the beaches and waters couldn't be more beautiful. take a boat ride, go fishing or just lay in the sun. we've got coastline to explore and wildlife to photograph. and there's world class dining with our world famous seafood. so for a great vacation this year, come to the gulf. its all fabulous but i give florida the edge. right after mississippi. you mean alabama. say louisiana or there's no dessert. this invitation is brought to you by bp and all of us who call the gulf home.

amidst violent protests, the once staunch live union state of michigan has become the country's 24th right to work state but the unions have already responded. they responded with anger, violence, thuggery and vulgarity and then killing themselves could have ripple effects throughout the whole nation. they are killing themselves in terms of marketing and pr. let's talk to bethany mandel. i made a few notes on this. "there will be blood," one wacked out assemblyman in 1947. threat, punches, smashed a tent of america for prosperity and the american media doesn't want to cover this. why is this? >> the narrative is unions protecting working man and then they are out to help benefits

and job prospects for millions of americans but that's unfortunately not the case anymore. >> even if they were out to help the ordinary man, this is about economic freedom for ordinary men and women, right? the right to join the union or not. the right to keep your paycheck or not. but even if that were true, their behavior, huggery, violence, the media will not cover this. >> it's remarkable how much they are willing to ignore for the sake of the narrative. >> which is the narrative? >> the union are the good guys -- >> it's it's a little rab narrative. >> yeah. >> and at the end of the day, a pro-baum narrative. >> yeah. >> i think the union is doing themselves great harm. haiy. there's a group in ohio, ohioans for workers freedom. this may come back, this is a

different issue. can it spread to ohio in your judgment? >> you know, it hard to say. i mean, 65% of ohioans are in support of the right to work. if they can get the signatures and get it on the ballot, i think it's possible. >> this is paycheck protection. it's just protecting your paycheck. >> yeah. >> and ohio, you think there's potential there? >> yeah. i mean, they have fewer been -- it should be a no brianer for voters. how serious. the governor of new jersey does not seek to end collective bargaining. but regarding right to week they is he can teep what they earned, order order for that to

get to him, it has to pass through a pretty hostile democratic leader. >> the same would be true in new york. you'd never get it past the new york legislature. let me ask you one more thing. my theory is the unions are screaming bloody murder here because they are being hurt where it hurts the most, in the pocketbook. it's their political dues, right, which is really at stake here. their membership is freaking and now in man couldn't. >> this is why they're squealing like stuck pig ps. >> and this is why the media is helping them out. if this money doesn't come, in where are they getting that money from? >> and where are they going to get the political money from? you take michigan, big state, but they still have 17% union,

some such thing. is this a demise of the political power? >> it could be if they doesn't start protecting their union members. we saw with host eest. >> if he don't continue to their their jobs, yeah, it could be deet miz. >> that is it for this evening as show. thanks for watching, everything. we will see you tomorrow night. americans are always ready to work hard for a better future.